Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

[wulfio]

The STARGATE TV franchise gave us 10 years of SG-1, plus additional series in ATLANTIS and SGU. That was a 14-year-run in a single continuity. Granted, STARGATE on TV wasn't exactly the same as STAR TREK, but continuity obviously wasn't the problem there; the newer series simply weren't as good as SG-1, so the stories didn't measure up, and the ratings declined.

SGU was a good show with good writing and acting. It suffered because the `true sg fans` were pissed it didn`t have the camp of the previous 2 series, and subsequently they boycotted it(From top to bottom it had the best acting of all the SG series). The result was a ratings nose dive and cancellation of the series.

Rather than appreciating the show for what it was, and allowing the showrunners to try out a different direction, the fans were ironically the reason why the franchise died, and the idea of the continuation of the franchise through spin offs was not even entertained.

It`d be the same as if everyone boycotting DS9 because it wasn`t trek, and forcing it to be cancelled. And then we wouldn`t have gotten 2 more series, and a few movies of star trek.

 

[Harvey]

I found Stargate: Universe to be badly written from top to bottom, and even then I gave the series 21 episodes before realizing it wasn't improving and abandoning ship.

I submit to you that fans (and, more widely, general audiences) gave up on the series because the producers erroneously believed that grim characterization and dark lighting would magically make it good television, not because of an unwillingness by fans to accept the series on its own terms.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

SGU was a good show with good writing and acting. It suffered because the `true sg fans` were pissed it didn`t have the camp of the previous 2 series, and subsequently they boycotted it(From top to bottom it had the best acting of all the SG series). The result was a ratings nose dive and cancellation of the series.

Rather than appreciating the show for what it was, and allowing the showrunners to try out a different direction, the fans were ironically the reason why the franchise died, and the idea of the continuation of the franchise through spin offs was not even entertained.

Have to agree with all of that. Of the three Gate series SGU is my favourite by far. Shame it wasn't given then same chance as the others.

It`d be the same as if everyone boycotting DS9 because it wasn`t trek, and forcing it to be cancelled. And then we wouldn`t have gotten 2 more series, and a few movies of star trek.

I love DS9, it is my favourite of all Trek and though I would've been horrified if they'd cancelled it, when you see how poor most of VOY and ENT turned out to be, not getting those series wouldn't really have been a bad thing.

 

[BillJ]

I submit to you that fans (and, more widely, general audiences) gave up on the series because the producers erroneously believed that grim characterization and dark lighting would magically make it good television, not because of an unwillingness by fans to accept the series on its own terms.

+1

 

[C.E. Evans]

I found Stargate: Universe to be badly written from top to bottom, and even then I gave the series 21 episodes before realizing it wasn't improving and abandoning ship.

I submit to you that fans (and, more widely, general audiences) gave up on the series because the producers erroneously believed that grim characterization and dark lighting would magically make it good television...

I can't remember where I read it for the life of me, but I recall an article in which someone applied almost the exact same sentiments to Trek, particularly in the area of visuals. It said something to the effect that after TNG, Trek shows started to become less and less colorful until they eventually became just downright murky with sets largely devoid of color and drab uniform costumes. I think the article referred to later Trek shows as being "visually uninteresting" (except when something was being blown up perhaps).

 

[wulfio]

I found Stargate: Universe to be badly written from top to bottom, and even then I gave the series 21 episodes before realizing it wasn't improving and abandoning ship.

I submit to you that fans (and, more widely, general audiences) gave up on the series because the producers erroneously believed that grim characterization and dark lighting would magically make it good television, not because of an unwillingness by fans to accept the series on its own terms.

I suppose we have very different taste and definitions of good. Because to me SGA was horribly written AND acted. It was sharknado territory. And save for MacGyver and his excellent delivery and comedic timing, SG-1 wasn`t much better. Christopher Judge was either way too campy, or just a really bad actor, either way I couldn`t enjoy him. I don`t recall any of the performances in SGU being laughable. I`m not sure what constitutes good for you.

I can understand if you`re tired of a certain tone in television. Are they guilty of using a few TV cliche`s? Sure. But why be totally dismissive of it? This was not a poorly written show despite their inclination to fall back on a music montage now and again. There were many positives in this show if people could appreciate things for what they are, and what they do good, rather than what they don`t do. Unlike SGA, this show was carried by a couple really good actors. However, If you consider this poorly written, then how on earth can you call the previous 2 series good? SG1 at least didn`t take itself seriously. But SGA tried to replicate SG1`s formula and failed. And when they tried to take themselves seriously, it was just the same caliber as movies on syfy.

I submit to you that this is exactly the attitude that killed the franchise.

 

[Harvey]

You won't hear me defend the quality of writing on Stargate: Atlantis. After the first season, it was mostly dreadful.

Having said that, Stargate: Atlantis at least had a sense of humor about itself -- usually -- which often (though not always) made it watchable. (The number of qualifiers speaks to my low regard for the series).

SGU abandoned the sense of humor completely, and replaced it with forced interpersonal conflict, dull characters, empty mysticism, and a pace that could be absolutely plodding.

SGU also absorbed many of the tropes of (better) serialized television dramas (shuffled chronology, secretive characters, pop song wrap-up montages, handheld photography, and more) without knowing how to properly use any of them.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Doctor Who is another show which, despite keeping mostly to the same continuity, has undergone a big shift in tone and execution since it's original run. Far from becoming dark and gritty, it's sped up by about 10x, replaced standing and talking with running and doing, and sexualized it's main character. IMO it's infinitely improved, but I'm sure that, like Trekkies longing for a return to the slower and talkier TNG, there are Who fans who want to bring the old style back.

 

[wulfio]

Doctor Who is another show which, despite keeping mostly to the same continuity, has undergone a big shift in tone and execution since it's original run. Far from becoming dark and gritty, it's sped up by about 10x, replaced standing and talking with running and doing, and sexualized it's main character. IMO it's infinitely improved, but I'm sure that, like Trekkies longing for a return to the slower and talkier TNG, there are Who fans who want to bring the old style back.

It`s weird, I just can`t get in to Who and Sherlock. Something about the cinematography throws me off.

 

[F. King Daniel]

It took me until very recently, and a few failed previous attempts, to get into Doctor Who. Now I'm a fan.

Maybe it's the accents? I watch so much American TV (especially sci-fi), it's weird to hear people in space, often in the distant future, who could live down the road.

 

[SPCTRE]

Maybe it's the accents? I watch so much American TV (especially sci-fi), it's weird to hear people in space, often in the distant future, who could live down the road.

I would reckon that's part of the appeal of the series.

I only recently watched my first full episode on SyFy (fortunately, they offer the original undubbed version via second audio program on cable). It was pretty funny actually. Google says it was "Amy's Choice" from season 5.

 

[F. King Daniel]

LOL, That's the episode I'm up to in my season five box set and will be watching tonight!!!!!

 

[SPCTRE]

It's good fun, it even has a village of geriatric zombies - well, sort of

 

[bbjeg]

It took me until very recently, and a few failed previous attempts, to get into Doctor Who. Now I'm a fan...

I'm currently dragging my feet through the first season of the new Who. Classic Who was easy to watch but the newer version isn't grabbing me yet. Hearing comments like that does help me struggle through it though.

 

[BillJ]

It took me until very recently, and a few failed previous attempts, to get into Doctor Who. Now I'm a fan.

My wife is a huge fan, but Doctor Who never has really grabbed me in the way Star Trek has. I went with her to see "The Rise of the Cybermen" on the big screen. Thought it was okay, but nothing about it made me want to watch more.

 

[Hober Mallow]

Man, this thread's still going?

It took me until very recently, and a few failed previous attempts, to get into Doctor Who. Now I'm a fan.

My wife is a huge fan, but Doctor Who never has really grabbed me in the way Star Trek has. I went with her to see "The Rise of the Cybermen" on the big screen. Thought it was okay, but nothing about it made me want to watch more.

I watched it off and on as a kid on PBS, mostly the Tom Baker and Peter Davison episodes. A year or so ago I tried to start from the beginning with the intention of watching all the episodes, at least all of the existing ones. I finished the first season, but I just couldn't do anymore.

 

[I am not Spock]

I used to be quite upset about the Abrams films dispatching with 50 years of canon. But really, the canon is irrelevant. The prime timeline is not coming back . At least not on screen. If you want your fix of the prime timeline, read the novels.

It would be like them hiring Pierce Brosnan for the next Bond movie. He's had his time. Or bringing back Adam West and the tone of the 60s series for the next Batman movie.

 

[I am not Spock]

Why not both? You can have Prime on TV or in animation, and Nu on the big screen. Worked for Superman. What with Smallville on television, and Superman Returns, co-existing at the same time.

 

[T'Girl]

If you want your fix of the prime timeline, read the novels.

Sure, any idea when the novels are going to return to the prime timeline?

 

[Greg Cox]

If you want your fix of the prime timeline, read the novels.

Sure, any idea when the novels are going to return to the prime timeline?

Huh? We never left.

Am I missing a joke here?